Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics - COLING '04 2004
DOI: 10.3115/1220355.1220399
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Polarization and abstraction of grammatical formalisms as methods for lexical disambiguation

Abstract: In the context of lexicalized grammars, we propose general methods for lexical disambiguation based on polarization and abstraction of grammatical formalisms. Polarization makes their resource sensitivity explicit and abstraction aims at keeping essentially the mechanism of neutralization between polarities. Parsing with the simplified grammar in the abstract formalism can be used efficiently for filtering lexical selections.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
32
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

5
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, as expected, the ECP method is more time consuming and for some sentences the time and/or memory required is problematic. To be able to apply the ECP to a large number of sentences, we have used it after another filtering method based on polarities and described in (Bonfante et al, 2004).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Second, as expected, the ECP method is more time consuming and for some sentences the time and/or memory required is problematic. To be able to apply the ECP to a large number of sentences, we have used it after another filtering method based on polarities and described in (Bonfante et al, 2004).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another much more recent concept of polarity can be used in grammatical formalisms to express that words introduce incomplete syntactic structures. IG directly use polarities to describe these structures but it is also possible to use polarities in other formalisms in order to make explicit the more or less implicit notion of incomplete structures: for instance, in CG (Lamarche, 2008) or in TAG (Kahane, 2006;Bonfante et al, 2004;Gardent and Kow, 2005). On this regard, Marchand et al (2009) exhibited a direct link between polarities and dependencies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this section, we recall a method which is formalized in a previous paper (Bonfante et al 2004) and we see how it applies to the IG formalism. The idea is close to tagging, but it relies on more precise syntactic descriptions than POS-tagging.…”
Section: Global Filtering Of Lexical Selectionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prior to RCG-convertion, the size of the subgrammar is reduced by applying lexical disambiguation [21]. Basically, we use automata-based techniques to precompute sets of compatible grammatical structures (i.e., compatible anchored trees for TAG, compatible anchored tree tuples for TT-MCTAG).…”
Section: Preprocessingsmentioning
confidence: 99%